DUCHESS’ PETITION.

Taihape Daily Times, Volume XI, Issue 3455, 8 April 1920, Page 5

DUCHESS’ PETITION.

SUIT IN DIVORCE COURT. LONDON, March 22. The Divorce Court to-day granted the petition of the Duchess of Marlborough for a decree for the restitution of conjugal rights. A defence was entered, hut was withdrawn at the last moment. The duke -was not present. Sir Edward Carson, representing the duchess, explained that a rather curious separation deed was executed in 1907, in obedience to which the parties met frequently for the sake of the children, discuss 1 family arrangements, and “resumed, in a certain sense, friendly relations,!’ When the children attained their majority the deed was- to be revised. The duke, in October 1919, suggested that hi s wife should return to him. The duchess consented, and they lived temporally together at Crowhurst. A few weeks after the resumption of relations, said Sir Edward, the duke wrote to his wife—“We have tried our best to mend the past, but I fear that owing to the long separation of upwards of 12 years we have grown too far apart to live together •happily again. ” The letter, however, did not convince the duchess, who invited a reconsideration. This the duke refused. The Duchess of Marlborough, who is a daughter of William K. Vanderbilt, of New York, was married to the present duke in 1895. Two sons w’ere born of tbe marriage, both oi whom are now of age. Outside peers of the blood royal, the Duke of Marlborough, who is ninth of his line, is the tenth, duke in order of precedence in the United Kingdoms. The present duke’s father was divorced by his wife, the Marchioness of Blauford, in 1883 after 14 years of married life.